[bestbits] Re: [discuss] Full Transparency of the Community Informatics Community

[Norbert Bollow]

Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:

> I had mentioned this during the Giganet process(which
> received positive response) and i will say it again to CI; any
> organisation that intend to provide a global representation "on
> behalf" needs to be open and willing to ensure its nomination process
> is globally inclusive and not just within its memberships.

The CI NomCom process did not intend or claim to choose a set of
representatives on behalf of “civil society as a whole” nor on behalf
of “academic communities as a whole”; it was a process of a specific
(pretty big) community that the Giganet Chair accepts as being (at
least in part) academic but not as having relevance to Internet
governance, and where the question of acceptance among the select few
networks that have formed the “civil society coordination group”
alliance is still pending.

Consequently (and IMO quite appropriately) this process was started
only as a “last resort” of sorts after it had become clear that
inclusion of the CI community in the processes that were being
organized with the aim of providing a complete set of representatives
for stakeholder categories would not be achieved in time for the
processes related to the São Paulo meeting (and probably never unless
the demand for inclusion would be asserted more forcefully than had been
the case so far), and also the CI NomCom's nominations do not provide a
full slate of nominations, hence there is no implied claim of
representing all relevant communities.

Greetings,
Norbert